When Tucker Carlson asked to join Journolist

I hoped to let my quick accounting of the constant inaccuracies in the Daily Caller's selective quotations from Journolist stand as my last word on the matter. But Tucker Carlson's sanctimonious and evasive statement on the way his site has been covering this story deserves a response. So allow me one more post.

Tucker's note doesn't bother to mention the actual questions that have been raised: That his stories have misstated fact, misled readers, and omitted evidence that would contradict his thesis. He doesn't explain how a thread in which no journalists suggested shutting down Fox News can be headlined "Liberal journalists suggest government shut down Fox News." He doesn't tell us why an article about the open letter that originated on the list left out the fact that I subsequently banned any future letters from the list. He doesn't detail why his stories haven't mentioned that one of his own reporters was on the list -- his readers would presumably be interested to know that the Daily Caller was part of the liberal media conspiracy.

Instead, Tucker says, well, trust him. "I edited the first four stories myself," he writes, "and I can say that our reporter Jonathan Strong is as meticulous and fair as anyone I have worked with."

If this series now rests on Tucker's credibility, then let's talk about something else he doesn't mention: I tried to add him to the list. I tried to give him access to the archives. Voluntarily. Because though I believed it was important for the conversation to be off-the-record, I didn't believe there was anything to hide.

The e-mail came on May 25th. Tucker didn't ask that it be off-the-record, so I'm not breaking a confidence by publishing it. Here it is, in full:

Dear Ezra,

I keep hearing about how smart the policy conversations on JournoList are, and am starting to feel like I'm missing out by not reading them. Could I join?

I realize you and I don't share the same politics, but I can promise you I have no interest in flaming anyone or even debating (I get enough of that). I'm just interested in knowing what smart progressives are saying. It strikes me that's the one thing I'm missing in my daily reading.

Please tell me what you think. If it makes you uncomfortable, ask around. I'm pretty sure we know a lot of the same people.

All best,

Tucker Carlson.

At the time, I didn't know Carlson was working on a story about Journolist. And I'd long thought that the membership rules that had made sense in the beginning had begun to feed conspiracy theories on the right and cramp conversation inside the list. I wrote him back about 30 minutes later.

We definitely have friends in common, and I'd have no worries about you joining. The problem is I need to have clear rules, as i don't want to be in the position of forcing fine-grained membership tests based on opaque criteria. Thus far, it's been center to left, just because that was how people wanted it at the beginning in order to feel comfortable talking freely. I've been meaning for some time to ask the list about revisiting that, so I'll take this opportunity and get back to you.

I then wrote this e-mail to Journolist:

As folks know, there are a couple of rules for J List membership. One is that you can't be working for the government. Another is that you're center to left of center, as that was something various people wanted back in the day. [Update: I should also note that I didn't allow media reporters onto the list, just so I've got all the rules down.] I've gotten a couple of recent requests from conservatives who want to be added (and who are people I think this list might benefit from), however, and so it seems worth asking people whether they'd like to see the list opened up. Back in the day, I'd probably have let this lie, but given that Journolist now leaks like a sieve, it seems worth revisiting some of the decisions made when it was meant to be a more protected space.

As I see it, the pro of this is that it could make for more fun conversations. The con of it is that it becomes hard to decide who to add and who to leave off (I don't want to have to make subjective judgments, but I'm also not going to let Michelle Malkin hop onto the list), and it also could create even more possible leaks -- and now, they'd be leaks with more of an agenda, which could be much more destructive to trust on the list.

I want to be very clear about what I was suggesting: Adding someone to the list meant giving them access to the entirety of the archives. That didn't bother me very much. Sure, you could comb through tens of thousands of e-mails and pull intemperate moments and inartful wording out of context to embarrass people, but so long as you weren't there with an eye towards malice, you'd recognize it for what it was: A wonkish, fun, political yelling match. If it had been an international media conspiracy, I'd have never considered opening it up.

The idea was voted down. People worried about opening the archives to individuals who could help their careers by ripping e-mails out of context, misrepresenting the nature of the ongoing conversation, and bringing the world an exclusive look into The Great Journolist Conspiracy, as opposed to the daily life of Journolist, which even Carlson describes as "actually pretty banal."

Apologetically, I went back to Tucker and delivered the bad news. But I still liked the idea of a broader e-mail list, and I offered to partner with him to start one. "There was interest," I told him, "in creating a separate e-mail forum with a more bipartisan flavor (such that Journolist could keep its character, but something else could provide the service we're talking about), and if that's something you want to do, I'd be glad to work on it with you."

He asked again if he could join Journolist, maybe on a read-only basis. He never responded to the idea of creating a bipartisan list. I was disappointed, but didn't think much of it.

My mistake, obviously. But if this series rests on Tucker's credibility, that's a soft foundation indeed. At every turn, he's known about evidence that substantially complicates his picture of an international media conspiracy. He knows I tried to let him in, odd behavior for someone with so much to hide and so much to lose. He knows I let one of his reporters remain a member. He knows I banned -- and enforced the ban -- on the sort of coordinated letter that served as example one of the list's conspiracy. He knows -- and never, to my knowledge, corrected -- that his reporter misrepresented the dates of Dave Weigel's posts to make it look like things he wrote at the Washington Independent were written at the Washington Post. And that's not even to mention the more prosaic deceptions of his selective choice of threads, truncated quotations, and misleading headlines.

When I e-mailed him to ask about some of these omissions, his response was admission mixed with misdirection. "I don't have nearly the grounding in this that Strong does, but according to him you often come off as a voice for moderation, and I'm pretty sure he will make that clear in a subsequent story." Ah, the old "we'll be more truthful later."

Tucker chose the good story over the real story. His traffic numbers reflect the popularity of his choice. Journolist has taken the Daily Caller from about 50,000 hits a day to more than 200,000. There are a lot more answers in those numbers, I fear, than in his editor's note.

“Keep the ideas coming! Have to go on TV to talk about this in a few min and need all the help I can get,” is not exactly the words that should be coming from the pen of a journalist.

The ethics charges against Charles Rangel might bump the JournoList issue from the top of the charts. Why should liberal "scientists," "journalists," and "scholars" be held to standards higher than those of elected officials? Should anyone be surprised that stories were contorted to fit a profitable political agenda?

Look at the names on the JournoList messages carefully -- this is an insight into the validity of "news"! And also note that Ezra Klein himself doesn't seem to participate in some of the more gruesome exchanges.

Ezra, admit it....you made a big mistake in trying to manage the opinion on Obama's behalf! I hope you are happy with the clown we now call, "President!" Pat yourself on the back! Ego...it's a bad thing!

It may be fair and balanced, but I've got a higher standard than that. I'm party to the off-the-record agreement. I haven't broken it. I haven't even broken the off-the-record communications I've had with Carlson, even though doing so would be useful. There are things you just don't do as a journalist, which makes this all the more frustrating. But if anyone thinks that I prefer this drip from the Daily Caller to a more representative sample from the list, I can assure you I don't.

Ezra Said: 'He doesn't explain how a thread in which no journalists suggested shutting down Fox News can be headlined "Liberal journalists suggest government shut down Fox News."'

You're correct, it was UCLA Law Professor Jonathan Zasloff who suggested that the FCC refuse to renew Fox's license. Some journalists supported him (e.g. John Judis of New Republic) while other journalists spoke out against such censorship (e.g. Michael Scherer of Time).

You are correct that they did not 'Suggest' the shutdown of Fox but instead that they 'Discussed' the shutdown of Fox. But honestly, would you be satisfied by the headline change: "Liberal journalists [discuss] government shut down [of] Fox News"?

On a seperate note, let me share something I learned in engineering school: A requirement must be quantitative and measureable. Otherwise, how can we determine that the requirement has been met? Political orientation is qualitative and cannot be measured accurately; determining whether someone is 'left of center' is going to depend on who makes the determination.

That's not to say that there was no requirement for your list. As I understand it, the real requirement was: "To become a Member of the list you must be approved by the Owner."

"Also, for being such "students of the constitution", right-wingers seem to be utterly hostile to the concept of free association."

lol-lol,

I think this is correct. Who cares that a bunch of liberal reporters and academics get together and talk in private, and occasionally some of them say shocking (to conservatives) things? Some allegedly wanted to have the government shutdown Fox News. I know lots of liberals who feel that way. I know lots of conservatives would be fine with Olbermann being thrown off the air too.

As long as the government doesn't actually censor the media it's not a problem.

Maybe there are a few tone related points lost by wanting to respond to the Wright issue by calling conservatives racists, but that's just normal mudslinging politics - hardly a scandal.

"It may be fair and balanced, but I've got a higher standard than that. I'm party to the off-the-record agreement. I haven't broken it. I haven't even broken the off-the-record communications I've had with Carlson, even though doing so would be useful. There are things you just don't do as a journalist, which makes this all the more frustrating. But if anyone thinks that I prefer this drip from the Daily Caller to a more representative sample from the list, I can assure you I don't."

Tucker Carlson is a partisan operative. Journolist was ill-fated in its assumption that this would not go public and that the right would not twist it for all it was worth. It's too ripe a topic for them not to go after: liberal bias and--horrors--an exclusive email listserv proves it.

Let us hope that after this week of rightwing shennanigans the rest of the country resolves not to be fooled again.

Apparently, it's Tucker Carlson's fault that Mr. Klein created his list. That the Washington Post was in the tank for Obama during the 2008 campaign is no surprise; the paper's ombudsman admitted as much. Perhaps the reason why Mr. Klein still has his job is because if the Post fired everyone who participated In Journolist, there would be nobody left to work at the paper.

This will hopefully help to open the public's eyes as to why so many stories that would cast a negative light on the Obama administration go unreported. Is it any wonder that the public feels such distrust toward big media? In particular, it's hard to feel much sympathy for a newspaper industry gradually sliding into oblivion when it's occupied by so many arrogant and unprofessional idiots.

What bothers me the most, Ezra, is that you fell for Tucker's quasi-intellectual schtick. I don't see how someone as smart as you doesn't see through the act when you listen to what he actually says and realize there is no logic to a lot of it. Surely you didn't let the bow tie fool you. Right?

I have to say I see you doing the same thing with Paul Ryan. Just because he's one of the few Republican legislators who are willing to play in your policy wonk world doesn't mean he deserves to be taken seriously. That budget thing he presented was laughable, but you treated it like it was worth discussing.

Do journalism associations or organizations possess a code of ethics? If so, the spewage from the Journolist would provide an excellent example of Conflict of Interest for ethics training. Did any of the 'Listers think "you know, I have to write an 'objective' article for my publication on McCain, Palin, Obama, Biden, and that means I have to recuse myself from these partisan rantings?" The rest of us here in the sticks who happened to be in professions of trust would be canned in a blink of an eye if we indulged ourselves in such blatant compromising of the interests of a customer. Your customer, the American people, were compromised by this behavior.

Why is anyone making an issue of the comments on this list? They are no different than the comments you hear from other superior people. It is general knowledge that Journalists have superior thoughts due to their keen intelligence, inquisitiveness, and insights.

The purpose of the expose was to show that the liberal media is not only liberally biased, but actually working for one side. Conservatives always suspected liberal journalists were singing from the same sheet of music.

The emails from JournoList show the writing of the music.

Again, not telling us anything we didn't already know, but it pretty much shows that Fox (or Faux) works for one side, and all the rest of you work for the other.

Some of the email exchange between Klein and Tucker Carlson seem to be quoted in their entirety. But others are paraphrased. I am interested in the one that begins "when I emailed him about some of these omissions...." Because he tells us that Carlson assured him that he came off well, the voice of moderation. It looks like Klein was worried about himself and expressed anxiety about how he would appear, and got friendly reassurance from Carlson. What elicited that reassurance is not something we can see, because the email that preceded it is only summarized.
He was rightly concerned about himself, but I wonder if he has done enough for his friends, quite a few of whom have been harmed, not just Dave Weigel, as Klein would have it. He created this venue in which intemperate people were allowed to do things that could later come back to hurt them, without stopping any of it. Even now, he says he can do nothing to stop the continued leaking. Really?

you were right,
when you wrote,
"you shall know them by their works."
you shall know them by their brokenness.
by their ruthlessness.
make no mistake.
this is not about seeking truth.

they lurk in the shadows.
they steal into private universes, and correspondences, leaking and blackmailing in a shadow-world,
with the intent of inflicting maximum harm and casualty.

using large sums of money to inflict maximum harm, to young journalists, innocent women.....
the means to an end.
the damage in their wake,
makes no difference.

this is not about seeking truth.
this is about deranged resentment,
rejection,
vengeance,
a jealousy
of talent, hard work, belongingness, friendship, youthfulness, success,brilliance.
it is their own disease.

stare it down.
eventually,
evil crumbles under its own weight.
calm and courage,
in the storm.
always.

I'm an expat Aussie, but I'm a permanent resident and I just fear for this country when people can't have logical, passionate discussions without one day those discussions becoming public. The likes of Tucker and Breitbart are just destroying intelligent conversation and the consequences are truly scary.
Ezra, keep up the good work - I assume you read these and while you probably don't need too much positive reinforcement you should know I appreciate what you do and I regularly refer your blog to others who want facts and analysis and not just screaming.

I give you credit for sticking to your "guns" and keeping your word to the other members even when some of them acted irresponsibly.

That being said you also should have realized that when it grew to the extent that it did that it eventually would be something you could not control and thus it could and would and did lose what I expect its intent was. That to me is the biggest problem.

Its like the person who has a vision to start a business and its all pure and wonderful and starts off great but then you grow and you lose that vision and eventually it becomes an "evil corporation". Its never quite the same as the joy you felt when you started.

I'm guessing (and obviously that's all it is) that you turned off the spigot a little too late and now we'll see those drips and drabs for as long as Daily Caller's hits continue to grow.

Tucker Carlson is an $$$hole. I read recently that he's the heir to the Swanson frozen TV dinner fortune. I'm a vegetarian now but in my late teenage years, when I got home from work, a TV dinner was the greatest thing. Oy! If only I knew!

Apparently, conservatives are so berift of ideas about how to run the country that they are cranking out ginned-up videos and petulant stories about left-wing bloggers talking mean behind Fox's back. Oh, the humanity!

In the real world of people who *don't* watch C-Span ten hours a day, folks are worried about feeding their kids and keeping a roof over their heads. Conservatives respond to these trivial demands by cutting their benefits.

When I was like 16, I really like a show Carlson and Bill Press had on CNN - I forget what it was called, but I think it was "The Spin Room." Carlson I remember Carlson coming off as smart and sometimes unorthodox - like, if I remember, he opposes the death penalty on moral grounds.

Carlson now just looks like a huge jerk. It looks like he got piqued from being excluded from the cool kid's table. He's also clearly smart as an editor/pr guy - people seem fascinated by Journolist, and it's increased his traffic. Which I'm sure was his goal.

The demand that Ezra release private emails is silly. I demand that everyone who demands Ezra release Journolist release their own private emails first! The public has the right to know!

This journolist report has resulted in a helpful way to cull my subscriptions. I purchase quite a few magazines for which the people on journolist write. Over the past few years there has been such a similarity of content that it has hardly been worth reading. Now I realize why I have felt this ..they were copying each other in substance. Makes for a dull public sphere.

I agree with adagio: Tucker played you like a violin, just as Paul Ryan did, and Olympia Snowe, and Lindsey Graham. You don't get the GOP because you haven't spent any time immersed in their worldview. And they're coming after your scalp -- the steady drip-drip is doing more to erode your reputation than any of your miscalls during the healthcare debate.

Andrew Sullivan's correct: the cliqueishness is disturbing -- why not take a hiatus from your friends and spend some time in other demographics? It's a big country out there. You may learn a thing or two.

yes. it is sad to see Ezra voraciously suck down all the bs from the Users. All about access to Versailles. like they wouldn't cut him left and right if the Party asked them too. Party comes first to these people, over people, over country.

the folly of Ezra's age/youthfulness is the appearance of wisdom of their elders/Rand et al. and Ezra has it bad. Talk about spin. they are spinning Ezra very adeptly.

From what I gather, if I were I right winger, I should be whipped into a froth about something called "JournoList", which seems to be some kind of e-mail discussion group of a much of professional colleagues. Can someone explain to be why, if I were a right-winger, I should get excited about this and treat it as some kind of scandal? Is there a summary available for what I should be upset about?

There seems to be a chorus (sockpuppets? would one of you be a "Cucker Tarlson"?) of people proposing a "solution" would be to make the archives public. Folks, you seem not to understand what "off the record" means. The solution to the violation of people's privacy is not to decide unilaterally to violate it some more.

So what's the point of this article? That Ezra Klein is a naive tool and his feelings are hurt? Seriously. Did Ezra object to the hit piece on McCrystal by that sack from Rolling Stone who connived his way into the General's trust? Of course not! You loved that! That's journalism at it's best! Remember? But when it bites YOU in the @ss, Ezra, we have to listen to your pathetic simpering about what a meanie Tucker is. Grow a pair. That's journalism. End of story.

Ezra: I've never met you, but I've followed you for quite a while and think you're a fine fellow and a very smart guy. Your association with the Washington Post can only hurt you. This faux-brouhaha just makes that clearer. They're probably going to dump you because of this, as they dumped your friend Dave Weigel, which will just make it all the clearer that the Washington Post is unworthy of the attention of serious people. It is, in fact, the most contemptible institution of American life, and I hate it more than I can ever tell you. Run away from it. They will not stand by you, and you should not stand by them. Have you read their editorial page in the last five years? How can you associate yourself with that kind of low-down filth? I assume you think you're furthering your career by working at a big MSM shop, but you're degrading yourself by working there.

Umm...McCrystal's interview was entirely on the record. Also, I don't believe "The Left" did celebrate it. All "The Left" that I know were put off by it and McCrystal. But please, don't let reality get in the way of your fantasy life.

Seriously, Ezra, as much as I don't care about this issue, I still feel bad that you have to deal with these...people. Sorry about that. Just know that many of us on "The Left" are tired of the gossipy rubbish that these people obsess over. You shouldn't have to put up with it, quite frankly. But then again, who should?

Gee, Ezra, it's nice to know that your follow Journolisters have the sense to know that their e-mails could be a problem if exposed to the daylight. So many on the Right just think that they are just soulless demons lost to the "dark side" but Luke was right .. they can be saved.

Gee Ezra, I guess you'll just have to be more careful with who you let into your little clubhouse the next time you wish to steer the electoral pulse so sharply to the left again. I don't doubt you've already got a good start on 2012.

Congratulations on being part of the group of people that have cast serious doubt on all liberal reporting and blogs for the past couple years. All the while, screaming Fox News as a propaganda machine, you proved nothing more in the end that you were all a bunch of hypocrites... you were what you accused the others of being. Even the most liberal of liberals that I talk with daily agree with that statement. You guys really screwed the pooch.

You think liberals looking down on you is bad? You should see what the other side thinks of you ex-JournoList cowards. Bravo:

ITs big fun watching the daily caller posters hem and haw about why Carlson won't release the context of the emails his is putting in his articles. I really like his "trust me and Mr. Strong to be fair" nonanswer about why he won't provide the emails in context. Free the threads!!!

Ezra I am not sure why you are whining about Tucker Carlson. It would seem your concern should be with one of your 'rats' that decided to jump ship. Isn't that how the Daily Caller obtained these innocent discussions between the enlightened members of 'Journolist'? Unless you are accusing Tucker of hacking into your listserv system.

Your outrage seems misplaced. Track down the leaker and go after him/her instead of spinning this as some kind of wingnut conspiracy. Loose lips always sink ships. Maybe one of the 400+ leftist hack 'journalist', activist, and esteemed professors discovered a conscience.

Political junkies on both sides of the debate already know that a majority of 'journalist' lean to the left. A huge majority actually. Luckily for you and your colleagues the non-politcos will never hear about this. There is already a blackout on this story outside of Fox News and the conservative blogs. Hell, even on that coverage most are giving the defense that this is just lefty opinion jounalist so it shouldn't really be unexpected. No surprise there. We already know the liberal media is biased to destroy conservatives while protecting liberals at all cost.

As far as context is concerned, Ezra please feel free to add some. I would love to see how attempting to shape the political debate among the MSM is somehow acceptable. I look forward to someone taking the time to match the comments from 'Journolist' to the dates of their actual stories that made their way to the unsuspecting electorate. That will be the only way we will know how much influence your little project had on shaping the MSM's narrative.

I always thought the journalist in this country were just repeating the DNC talking points that they were given. I had no idea that you and your fellow liberal journalist might actually be reponsible for creating your own talking points. I look forward to finding out exactly how important your group was as an official arm of the Democrat party.

"As soon as the right blogs publish their email exchanges in their entirety," in which Jymn assumes that the conservatives practice the same sort of epistemic dishonesty that the marxists like Ezra & his band of 400 sneaks conspired to inflict on the nation's readers.

Thanks for inflicting the USA with the WORST president in its history, or at least the most incompetent & dishonest. Obama couldn't have got to the Oval Office without the help of the corrupt media & more corrupt Journolist.serv cabal members.

"Adding someone to the list meant giving them access to the entirety of the archives. That didn't bother me very much."

Srxy, Ezra, but that was simply naive. Obviously the other journolisters had a much more realistic view of that than you. And if you seriously trusted effing Tucker Carlsson eough to add him to the list, this also explains all the leaks before the dam burst. Too many untrustworthy characters in the list. For instan ce the guy who works for the DailyCaller. You really trusted someone who works for this right wing attack outfit? Now, really...

If it was just a "wonkish, fun, political yelling match", there would be no line by line discussions of Palin political assassinations matching up with actual on-air or in-print activity. Like the Climategate emails, JournoList members said what they said and are now saying "but we really meant...."

Don't worry. Your collective credibility has taken no hits it didn't already suffer from. How's that hope and change working out for you?

Ezra, I don't think Tucker's credibility is at issue here, it is YOUR CREDIBILITY and the credibility of every liberal progressive member of your cozy little group. The fact that this cozy little group even existed is appalling !! The fact that your cozy little group CONSPIRED for political purposes to pursue a progressive friendly agenda for Obama renders any argument you might have now ......MUTE !!!!!!!

Every member IN YOUR COZY LITTLE GROUP SHOULD BE FIRED !!!!

I don't know why you even wrote this piece, all you have proven is what A REAL COZY GROUP YOU HAD GOING by denying Tucker access !!

Tucker's disclosure of your COZY LITTLE GROUP only confirms what we have all known for years and the reason WE don't read nor support the PROGRESSIVE RAGS anymore !!!!!!!!

The fact that you still write in WAPO says trillions why this publication is no longer respected and the reason why people FLOCK TO FOX and Tucker becomes the hero of the day !!!!!!!!!

The whole thing is unseemly and, frankly, disappointing. Little-rich-boy Tucker spilling the other cool kids "secrets" because he wasn't invited into the tree-house.

And while the privileged play their one-upmanship games, it turns out the country ends up wallowing in the worst financial crisis in 100 years, maintaining two shooting wars, unable to pass any basic bit of legislation that's not larded with pork for one favored group or another. It's pretty sick, tbh, and destructive to the truth which I don't think anybody would recognize anymore if it slapped them in the a$$.

What a feeble and sad little swipe at "journalistic" revenge this is. Nothing you have said in your whiny responses detracts one iota from the force of the Daily Caller's expose of your tawdry junior-journalist echo-chamber incubator.

So Carlson asked to join. Your point? Is there one somewhere?

Is it that you, Ezra, "tried" to add him, making you personally less guilty than some of your members who wanted to watch Rush Limbaugh die or smash a random conservative's figurative head through a plate glass window?

And, no, Ezra, you did not try to add Carlson. You asked your members whether Carlson should be let in, and they said no. That sort of proves Carlson's whole point, doesn't it? The Journolisters said, No, to letting a nonleftist join, because they didn't want any nonleftists seeing what they were saying or how they were coordinating the message.

While you are trying to nitpick imagined inaccuracies in the Daily Caller's skewerings of your electronic sheepfold, one might think you would be a little more accurate about what is seemingly the main "point" of your pointless complaint.

The same with your remark that you wouldn't have entertained Carlson's request had you known he was "working on" a story about Journolist -- you never show that he was working on such a story in May. Details, Ezra, details. These things destroy your credibility.

Again, what exactly does it prove that there was a member who was a Daily Caller reporter? Surely you aren't suggesting that this shows the list was open to nonleftists? The rejection of Carlson proves that it wasn't.

You address the shameful ABC letter in equally disingenuous fashion. Your defense that you "banned" such letters only shows that even you found it inappropriate, but your banning of circulation of such letters hardly establishes that you banned future "coordination," as you suggest. Do you think readers are too stupid to notice these evasions? This isn't high school any more.

Finally, Carlson's response to your complaints in no way means "We'll be more truthful later." You are just practicing the old, "Your story isn't truthful if it doesn't include favorable qualifications about me." It isn't less than truthful to report that Spencer Ackerman called Republicans "f______ NASCAR retards" and suggested random charges of racism without adding that you personally were more moderate in your views.

You should go off somewhere and ponder first principles of integrity and reason. As someone else said, no one is listening to you any more, if anyone outside your tiny set ever did.

Who was the first to say that the last post wouldn't be Ezra's last on Journolist? That it couldn't be?

That being said, my fellow conservatives are way-distorting this. Especially when the try and act like the sort of inane, immature, my-gosh-is-this-guy-a-professional-journalist garbage penned by Spencer Ackerman was actually something Ezra said, or condoned. Something of which there was no evidence.

And Tucker Carlson is, politics completely aside, kind of a d-bag. Only there's really no "kind of" about it.

Ironically, The Daily Caller is probably going to do pretty well, and will have Ezra Klein and Journolist to thank for that.

1. For journalists, the Journolist people were astonishingly naive. "People worried about opening the archives to individuals who could help their careers by ripping e-mails out of context." Really? Then why did they put such statements in writing where hundreds of people could have access to them? They read daily about people whose writings landed them in hot water and yet ....

2. The next time you or anyone else on Journolist starts to write that bankers or Republicans or Democrats or home buyers behaved in a moronic way, and how could they have not known that whatever, and oh blah blah blah, stop and think to yourself, "oh yeh, Journolist."

3. It is delightful to see certain people who specialize (see, e.g., Ackerman) in smug snark about the idiots who disagree with them be revealed to be idiots.

Some jackass here mentioned freedom of association. No one has a problem with that. The fact that libertards see no connection with the suggestion from a JournoList participant to call any conservative racist as a tactic to take pressure off of the Jeremiah Wright controversy and the pronouncements from the Left to call the TEA party racist because they disagree with this administrations policies is proof that the followers of these Leftist politicians and "journalists" are useful idiots! That kind of behavior is not journalism and is not the definition of freedom of association! Dumbass!!

I am amused watching a lot of right wing senior citizens who only started using e-mail around 2002 or so apoplectic about professional colleagues shooting the breeze on a listserv. Go back to sending your grandchildren cute cat pictures and Obama-is-a-Muslim-sleeper-agent e-mail forwards and reading Sarah Palin's facebook status updates. They've been told they're supposed to be outraged about... something -- I don't know what, and they don't explain -- so they are dutifully obliging.

Now if you don't mind, I have to get back to work where I'm going to end up talking about work-related stuff over e-mail with my own friends and colleagues.

""We all have lists of these names, now, Ezra. We've made a conscious effort NOT to read what they write anymore""

@lol-lol: "Also, for being such 'students of the constitution', right-wingers seem to be utterly hostile to the concept of free association."

I, a right-winger, have brought this up before. Why should being journalists or academics disqualify the members of Journolist from the guarantee of free association? Unfortunately, I think the majority of people of any stripe are in the mode of "I hold steadfast to these principles, except when it's convenient to not hold steadfast to them" camp.

"You know, that thing that the 1st amendment guarantees? Then again, most teabaggers have never actually read the Constitution let alone understood it."

Of course not. Because they're all stupid and worthless. If only there was a handy plate glass window . . . ;)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
You're conned!
You have ZERØ credibility, now, be a good boy and go and cry with your buddies!
YOU'RE A DISGRACE TO JOURNALISM!!! ØØØuuups! you are a JØURNØLIST!!
Gøød luck, høpe and change!

@ChagrinRick: "You can't take the high road with scorpions. Quit trying."

That's the same things the conservative base has always been saying to the GOP. "Don't play fair, don't make deals, you can't trust those socialist Democrats!"

Well, now the GOP and much of the punditry is following that sage advice. I think much of what going on today essentially involves the constituents getting what they want. No doubt, you'll be getting what you want from your liberal brethren very, very soon.

@Ezra: "I haven't even broken the off-the-record communications I've had with Carlson, even though doing so would be useful. There are things you just don't do as a journalist, which makes this all the more frustrating."

I understand that in principle, but it also sounds a little like: "I'm a journalist, and as a journalist, I can't tell you want I know that would make this all make a lot more sense. So, even though this a story, and I'm not kind of part of that news story, I can't actually explain it to you, because I'm a journalist."

I, for one, at once laud you taking the high road, while at the other moment urge you to release all of your correspondence with Tucker Carlson immediately.

Think of it as basically the climategate of left wing media (i.e., THE media).

I just feel somehow violated by the abuse of trust in between these journalists and the people who looked to them for some objective guidance on issues, when in reality they were being fed a message slightly more coordinated than hillary's primary team.

I've always though Tucker Carlson was a pretty solid journalist. This is a real service. It's sad when the ones you need to report on are your own colleagues. There is few better public services Tucker could have done than this though.

I'm not seeing much integrity out of any journalist these days, no matter what side of the aisle or political persuasion that they hail from.

I believe that real journalism is deader than a doornail. It's all slanted, biased and manipulated in order to serve some sort of agenda. Journolist sees no problem in a bunch of people sitting around talking about slandering candidates and officials during a presidential election with the evil brush of racism to help their candidate. Breitbart sees no problem in editing his video because he's in a p match with the NBBP and doesn't consider the collateral damage of Sherrod's reputation and career.

There are no saints in this, no 'good side' to be on. There is also no character, integrity or any positive standard that they're rising to, in fact it's absent.

Don't talk to me about private conversations or your belief system. Everyone is failing to recognize that all they're doing is acting out in public, and from where I sit, you ALL look bad.

The ends don't justify the means. The political gain doesn't justify the attitude and the behavior. Btw, that wasn't your job in the first place. You were supposed to report the news, not try to influence it or make it.

Perhaps we can now can the debate over why people are fleeing the MSM. It's not about the internet or other alternative media, it's because of the content and why it's being generated. Who wants to be a subscriber to propaganda? Historically speaking, people used to nail that drek to telephone poles.

You guys are killing not just careers but the profession in general. You can talk all day about who said what to whom, but it comes down to the same thing.

Rightwing nutjob Tucker Carlson is a liar, and his minions are dishonest hacks and your bosses, Ezra, think he's as honest and neutral as rageaholic Andrew Breitbart.

Apparently these are the slings and arrows one must endure to be a good company man at Kaplan Test Prep Daily. Keep up the good work, as it could be worse, you could be stuck working for a racist nutjob like Marty Peretz.

I'm on the right and I have no problem with the contents of the list. The only comment published so far that really mattered was Spenser Ackerman's "brand them racists." This is a public confirmation of one of the many suspicions the right has intuited about the left but never had the smoking gun.

Ackerman's comment, while certainly within his rights, is now Exhibit A in the race debate controversy. As the left claims the right is racist (usually without evidence), the right now can claim the left is race-baiters ... with evidence.

You know we can't just take your word for it when we also know you are hiding the files from the public. Cry baby all you want but until you publish the files to back up what you say well, then, we'll take what we do see at face value. Most of us do remember that Obama tried to shut down FOX news just as your journolists wanted. You are disgusting.

You and your buddies were caught. It's embarrassing. I understand that. I think you would best be served by either a. taking your medicine and staying quiet, or b. providing the complete list so readers can get all the perspective their heart desires.

I wonder if Peter Wallsten is part of Journolist... He is the reporter at the LA Times that refused to release the video of the Obama/Khalidi/Ayers/Dohrn lovefest. No, it was more important to bash Palin for her clothing budget.

Seriously, Ezra, do you not see the crimes you and your cabal have committed against a free and independent press? You have damaged your profession almost beyond repair.

This is pathetic. I feel like I'm a high school principal about to dispatch some discipline on some fairly intelligent incorrigibles. And in Mr. Klein here is what we have posing as centrist journalism in America. Unbelievable.

But you said it first. Did not. Did so. Did not. Did so. Unbelievable but one thing that is believable is the LIST email threads. Not much to spin there as it’s all quite clear.

Why won't Tucker Carlson release all the emails? What is Tucker Carlson hiding? Isd thyere somebody on Jornolist Tucker Carlson wants to protect, is that why he refuses to release all the emails?

I don't understand why the Daily Caller refuses to release the full archive of emails? maybe the Daily Caller has an agenda, maybe the Daily Caller is afraid of informing it's readers, or maybe Tucker Carlson is just too afraid of doing the right thing.

I don't think any opf us should rest until Tucker Carlson releases all the emails, and stops hiding things from us. Just because Tucker Carlson is afraid to release the full archive does not mean we should let up on Tucker and the Daily Caller and demand they do their duty to the public.

So Mr. Klein, why don't you tell your foolish followers of the numerous Obama campaign staffers who were on Journo-List?

We know of at least two, Orszag and Bernstein, and it appears that Rahm Emmanuel may have been as well? How many more?

Why shouldn't the operations of this group not be included in campaign finance reform? Just how much would Barry Obama have to pay for the free media and advertizing you provided? Should he not have to buy advertising just like the Republican candidate?

Were you on the list when your fellow Journo-Lister were to the White House in February by fellow Journo-Lister, Jared Bernstein? Was that a little treat for all the unscruplous services?

Barack Obama, the greatest conjob in the history of American politics and journalism.

i don't think there is any conspiracy. the larger problem is the basic premise of the listserv -- a wonky, poltical off the record site fot those left of center who work in media.

the fact that you consider youself a jounalist and don't seem to appreciate how this contributes to groupthink is frightening. even something as simple as asking for a contact in "issue area XX" is dangerous. it's a shortcut, its lazy, and it leads to the same people being used as sources.

even more distressing is the fact your editors seem to be ok with this.

personally, if you haven't worked in a small market, i don't think you've earned the right to have the Post's imprimatur.

A little defensive there, huh Ezra? If there's nothing to defend, stop defending yourself. Look, you and your pals in the media have been outed. It comes as no surprise to us on the right, but I'm glad to see that we have clear evidence that these so-called journalists are nothing but partisan hacks. If in fact these are misrepresentations, quotes taken out of context, etc., then please release the e-mails/posts that clarifies the context for us. Tucker has issued that challenge. If you are in fact being Breitbarted, as your supporters claim, wouldn't it behoove you to release the entire context to prove it? Breitbart has now lost credibility even on the right. I'm sure he'll even lose followers because of the Sherrod episode. Next time he releases anything, I can assure you that FoxNews and the WH will be doing their homework. But I have a feeling that's not the real issue. I remember Obama making the same arguments when the Wright tapes came out. They were just "soundbites" being taken out of context by talk radio, FoxNews, etc. The American people didn't buy it, so he threw his longtime spiritual adviser under the bus. Some things are as clear as day. Unless, that is, you can explain to me how context would shed more light on comments suggesting that one would laugh while watching Rush Limbaugh die of a heart attack. Or maybe how context would shed more light on suggestions to kill the Wright story by accusing conservatives of being racist. Could it be that these individuals later retracted those comments and Tucker is simply withholding that information? Or maybe it was all just a joke, and 3 or 4 postings before and after those comments will provide that context. If so, you'd gain a lot more credibility if you released it to the public.

It's very simple, Ezra. You hurted widdle Tucker's fee-fees, and now he's going to have his revenge. He really is no better than a sixth-grader, and in a just world, he would be ignored as such. Unfortunately, as has been clearly demonstrated, we do not live in such a world. I say the only defense against corrupt journalistic practices (e.g., Faux News, Dimbart and Carlson) is to keep slamming them with the facts. And let's call these folks what they are; racists, bigots, plutocrats. Nice crowd to run with...

Ezra,
The best argument for a closed list is what an open list discussion looks like **THIS**.
"Racist, Racist, I dare you to call me a racist you racist".
Maybe the right has closed lists. Maybe they need them less because they can outshout anybody, and never tire of saying the same things over and over again. I'm sure some groups of operatives do because they *truly* don't want people to know what they're saying. Now they're going to dare you to open your full archives, to provide 100 times as much fodder to be SHERRODed (The right can talk about "Borking").
I'll wager that right wing journalists don't need anything like Journolist -- even the conspiratorial Journolist of their wild imaginations because they are an integral part of the whole right wing movement, with its conferences and other venues in which tactics for pushing this agenda or smearing this or that person are discussed openly.

Journolister Paul Krugman is still carrying water for this administration trying to insist that Republicans/Tea Partiers want to return to Bush.

Bush, Bush, Bush.

For G-d's sake, we get it. Run against Bush even though most independents and conservatives hated that Bush signed TARP, that he expanded government, hated that Bush considered blanket amnesty. Hated that Bush expanded Medicare.

Most are looking for polliticians who will not add to the deficit, the debt and government intervention into our lives. Most voters are too savvy to fall for this Journolisters.

We get it. We are racist. Everything is Bush's fault. Palin is stupid.

That is what you think and that is what you will print all the way until you become insignificant and have to plead with this administration, that you rabidly and indiscriminately promoted, to save you from extinction.

We all know the vast majority of the standard media favored Dems but if one cannot put aside his personal preferences in favor of truth it is evidence of a lack of the required critical thinking necessary to provide the 1st amendment protected service of giving citizens honest information.
Obama's Wright, Ayers connections, his lack of paper trail as regards transcripts etc. should have been reported rather than hidden especially in a conspiratorial manner albeit a pretty juvenile conspiracy.
Palin should have been researched but not hounded. The point of the journalist is in the end to give the public honest info, opinions on this info are fine, but blind justice has been mocked by the current state of the media and it is no wonder business is plummeting.

Ia this the new agreed upon "plan of attack" that all of you will be taking now? Where are you meeting these days? Can we expect to see a variety of JOURNOLISTers repeat this same argument in other media outlets? Of course Ezra thinks there is nothing wrong with the whole Journolist concept. Collusion is only wrong when others do it, like oil companies, and insurance companies, and financial companies! Fairness and transparency and honesty are for others to integrate into their lives. You see, the brilliant ones, the geniuses, the elite, think they are above all the rules. THEY ONLY MAKE the rules, WE ARE TO ABIDE by them.

What a sham you and your friends have turned journalism into. What. A. Sham.

How dare you and your fellow listers subvert democracy? How dare you take the special rights that journalists have as per the Constitution and DECIDE for Americans what we need to know and who is good for us politically.

Where's your downside? Since you support certain candidates and issues and suppress information to promote them - if they don't work out shouldn't you have to pay?

That's the best part - it doesn't impact you at all while the rest of us suffer.

Come this November when the Republicans take back the House, I hope they hold hearings on the state of journalism (after all, there's talk the industry wants tax dollars to support them) and haul all of you in front of cameras to answer for all of this.

Ezra - If your criticism of Tucker is that he is misleading readers by leaving out exculpatory information, you have a solution.

Report and let the people decide. Release all the emails.

Until then, I think you are the one hiding the most despicale ways hard news in most mainstream news outlets was carefully tailored to help your chosen candidate to become President, effectively corrupting the process of democracy in this nation.

The real beauty underneath all this is that Americans have been catching on and tuning out the biased news sources and now they get their new unfiltered from more reliable honest journalists and news reporters at Fox News.

The final blow will be when Tucker Carlson releases all the names of all the reporters and we see what disgracefully partisan reporters compose of establishment news agencies like NBC, Reuters, AP, Newsweek, Time, CNN, Politifact, Washington Post, NY Times, etc.,.

So Ezra, you telling me that no one on the list decided to down plat the Rev. Wright issue? You know damn well that if it was a Republican going to a church the preached hate, you and your ilk would be reorting around the the clock, 24/7/365.

You are full of it. Yo think Fox news is bad, but you do not condem Olberman for all of his hate, do you?

Journalism has become a cesspool. The public has long known it; Journolist only confirms our suspicions. While your progressive minions bemoan Tucker's actions, most of America considers him a valiant hero, the lone voice of one crying out in the madness that is the Beltway.

Spin it any way you like; those are the facts. You know it, the Post knows it, other struggling old media outlets know it. Journalism has breached its own sacrosanct traditions and the public will never forget it. I believe the Post will fold within a year, with other outlets soon to follow.

We shall not miss you, nor your superior bloviating. Americans are not nearly so vacuous as you and your friends thought, sir. Our synapses fire just fine, thank you, and our memories, believe me, are quite long indeed.

But I invite you to prove me wrong, sir. Post the disgusted reactions to Sarah's wish to see Rush Limbaugh suffer a painful death in her presence while she "laughs like a maniac". How did your progressive friends respond to her wish?

Ezra,
Sorry to say, old man, but your credibility these days is, how should I say, strained a bit. It seems as if, at least to some extent, you and your collegues were focusing more on a propagandistic shaping of your preffered public narrative then actual reportage. And to that extent, it seemed as much about getting your stories straight, all together on the same page-as it were, than simply exchanging ideas.

I was especially disheartened that there wasn't more outrage amongst the "listies" regarding Ackerman's suggestions to arbitrarily and capriciously brand opponents as racists, in order to change the subject.

No, it's going to be hard to believe what you and many of the list memebers out forth for some time to come.

Indeed, nothing personal, but because of the way you all willfully violated what is commonly thought to be journalistic ethics, I feel strongly that the Post should part ways with you.

It's shameful really, and indefensible; regardless if you spent more time talking about banalities, video games, and other sophmoric pursuits than colluding on "the narrative".

Ezra,
Sorry to say, old man, but your credibility these days is, how should I say, strained a bit. It seems as if, at least to some extent, you and your collegues were focusing more on a propagandistic shaping of your preffered public narrative then actual reportage. And to that extent, it seemed as much about getting your stories straight, all together on the same page-as it were, than simply exchanging ideas.

I was especially disheartened that there wasn't more outrage amongst the "listies" regarding Ackerman's suggestions to arbitrarily and capriciously brand opponents as racists, in order to change the subject.

No, it's going to be hard to believe what you and many of the list memebers out forth for some time to come.

Indeed, nothing personal, but because of the way you all willfully violated what is commonly thought to be journalistic ethics, I feel strongly that the Post should part ways with you.

It's shameful really, and indefensible; regardless if you spent more time talking about banalities, video games, and other sophmoric pursuits than colluding on "the narrative".

Yes, everyone, journalists have biases. Media companies have biases. This is plainly obvious and long known. The first amendment provides for freedom of speech, not unbiased media.

And yes, sometimes journalists with get on the internet and discuss things with those with the same bias. Some might even say some inappropriate things in private.

What, exactly, is shocking here?

Ezra's a liberal and it's obvious from reading his posts that he's trying to promote the liberal viewpoint. That aside, he does a good job of using evidence and logic that you can accept or reject. Even where I disagree, I find his commentary informative and often it helps me rethink issues. Who cares if he might coordinate pieces with other liberal journalists? Who cares if liberal journalists want to downplay stories which are damaging to liberals? We can rely on conservative media outlets to amplify those same stories.

Call me when the probability of Ezra and his merry band of journalists actually shuting down conservative speech is greater that 0.01.

" It may be fair and balanced, but I've got a higher standard than that." WHAT STANDARDS?
Your 'standards' can be summed up in one line - 'By any means neccesary' You and your Pravda cohorts are the new Ministry of Truth.
Carlson, Briebart, Drudge are Journalists. Ezra Klien and the rest of his ilk are water carrying hacks.

justin84 - Ezra's guilt comes out his leadership role in coordinating the intentional manipulation of hard news coverage in multiple news outlets to acieve a specific political result.

Imagine if the owners of all the news outlets got together and agreed to tailor their news coverage for the purposes of getting Republicans elected----getting John McCain elected President?

As I said, the real magnitude of this corruption can only be known when we have a complete list of the writers.

Associated Press, Reuters, Politifact, NBC, Time, Newsweek are utilized by many Americans to get their news. IF they make bold decisions like for instance not reporting on how $2 million dollars was laundered from the Chinese government into the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign and that in fact their were convictions of straw donors like Maria Hsia, Charlie Trie, James Riady.....the fact that that never made a headline in almost every major paper is remarkable and can only come about when we have a virtual Pravda news agency created by this dishonest collusion through the United States supposedly "free" press.

And it could even much worse.

We all now how leftist propaganda has been bought and paid for by George Soros to create his puppets like Media Matters to try and spread massive disinformation and prevent any honest liberal from even considering watching a minute of Glenn Beck, lest his mind be liberated from Soros-mind control....

What if Soros and/or Terry McAuliffe paid people like Ezra off the books to coordinate this?

I seem to remember Terry McAuliffe throwing huge soirees for massive numbers of hard news reporter in Las Vegas a few years back....what was that all about?

I think there is a huge unexamined side of the right wing noise machine is ripe for journalistic investigation: the emails that try to look like they are from a friend of a friend.

A year ago I started getting emails my parents' friends had forwarded to them. There would be lists showing who had previously forwarded the item to the friend, and so on, but it was never clear who put it together.

My parents have always been pretty mainstream Republicans. My Mom still has some admiration for FDR and Truman, and feels Nixon got what he deserved, and they are far from ready for the revisionism that says we were "stabbed in the back" by liberals over Vietnam. She has just gotten through reading 3 Cups of Tea and loved it.
They live in a wealthy retirement community with mostly college educated people (ages generally 60-80 and up) who've run small to middle sized businesses and the like.

And they and their friends were getting, and believing in the emails with the links to YouTube videos proving Obama deliberately failed to salute the flag when generals and cabinet members around him were saluting. My mother is distressed and saying "What can you say to defend a man like that?" Actually they were saluting the president while "Hail to the Chief" was played. The email was called "The Crotch Salute" because of the awkward position of Obama's hands. Googling "crotch salute" I get 11,400 hits so it has gotten around and precious few of the hits have anyone debunking it.
They get "parables" in which Obama is portrayed as a smooth Marxist/Mafia thug. And other parables with simplistic economic implications.
They contain bits like "what if I were to tell you that Obama wants to dismantle conservative talk radio through the imposition of a new "Fairness Doctrine. that he wants to curtail the First Amendment rights of those who may disagree with his policies via internet blogs..."

Would you say, "C'mon, that will never happen in America ." (this one is a sort of 12 part call-and response thing).

They received a tirade against Obama by Gene Iacocca which was really a 3 year old anti-Bush screed with selective omissions and just one addition.

Some of them have gotten clever enough to say "Approved by Snopes" when in fact Snopes called them a fraud.

They take an essay from a right wing crazy site and call it an "article" (they never distinguish between "article" and op-ed) from the prestigious WSJ.

It seems the right wing propaganda apparat has 3 parts: (1) The Emails where everything EVERYTHING I've seen has been full of blatant lies. (2) wild bloggers who deal in stuff that has a shred of something to back it up (they can't help it if some pure and simple lies get into their comments section (http://eisenhowersocialist.blogspot.com/2010/05/climate-change-and-energy-policy.html)
(3) Finally the stars, who avoid sue-able libel, and deal in interpretations rooted in millions of under the radar words that THEY don't have to risk saying.

If the 400 JournoList were all known-Liberal editorial writers who are up-front or virtually up-front with their biases and agenda, this would be not any real problem at all.

We already know of at least a few hard news reporters though. If there were no more, this would be only a relatively minor ethical lapse.

But if there are upwards of 25 or more hard news reporters ranging from multiple hard news agencies, then it is fair to say the entire American political system has been annhiliated by Ezra's shameful dishonesty and it is nothing more than the kind of underhanded Progressive power grab that has been typical of Progressive movement throughout American history----even moreso if there was any Soros money involved.

This is how our nation can be destroyed!

Adding insult to injury was the very despicable Tom Toles cartoon a day ago implying that supporting the United States Constitution is the same as supporting racism and slavery....even Frederick Douglass warned Americans of how despicable a lie that is....but then again most liberals wouldn't know what Frederick Douglass actually said!

Let me get this straight-- you run a left-wing cabal that allows journalists to plot and scheme about ways to promote a political agenda, you exclude from this purportedly journalistic endeavor anyone whose politics don't mirror your own (while blaming others for this), you then get called on it, and now you're blaming the guy who caught you red-handed for: a) having an inaccurate headline-writer; and b) not having your sterling moral character. You and your friends have turned journalism into a sick joke. Quit lashing out at an unelightened world that refuses to share your values, and try honest reporting for a (healthy) change.

This leaves only one solution.
Open the archives for all to see so we can see who's telling the truth and what was actually plotted and planned.
I hope someone will release all of this to the public. Something tells me you will be quite embarassed.

There is not a thinner skinned group of people in America than journalists.

They demand transparency and conspire among themselves in the shadows.

They destroy lives (Let's pile on Bristol and Trig! Hey! I saw a politician and a hooker!) without a second thought in the name of the progressive revolution yet yell the loudest and whine the most when they are "taken out of context."

The print boys (and girls) say they don't want fame and they only serve the truth. Just don't get between any one of them and a TV camera if you don't want hurt.

Man up, Ezra. You were caught. You want to give context then publish the lot. Will people be embarrassed? Sure, but only because they (and you) deserve it.

I don't think you or your colleagues understand the Right at all, it has caused you to hemmorage readers, and someone in Management up there needs to realize that and go find some new talent that better reflects the sensibilities of the majority of the American people. I used to read Newsweek, Time, U.S.A. Today, the Houston Chronicle, watch Nightline every night, watch ABCNews Evening News, and listen to Larry King's old radio show regularly as a suburban kid growing up in Houston. I recently subscribed to Newsweek again and found it grossly biased and completely unreadable. For example, there was a discussion about Bush firing the U.S. Attorneys and how it was not the same as Clinton firing the attorneys and no where did it mention that these folks all serve at the pleasure of the President. I also find that there is huge lack of wisdom among the 20 somethings in DC who love to point out snarky comments about Sarah Palin winking or her kid not wearing a seatbelt or how much Mrs McCain's dress costs $6M and that makes a huge difference to some people. It is the immaturity of it all that is shocking. If the news industry wants to get some readers ditch the kids who don't know anything and have no historic or economic knowledge, going to graduate school these days makes these kids full up of CIA Central American horror stories, loads of belief in Market failure, and no understanding or even basic knowledge of all the things they hold most dear being tried time and time again in places around the world and having failed miserably and put some thoughtful balances writers in your papers. I see this administration as the opportunity for this generation to learn the forgot mistakes of the 1960's and 70's all over again and will result in the realization that the bigger the government becomes the smaller the individual.

Assuming I'm right about the right wing emails, etc., how can the lies and their sources be exposed?

I think first of all, people are vastly underestimating the impact. I'd propose ongoing polling. Watch them as they emerge and circulate. http://myrightwingdad.blogspot.com/ can help with that, and just poll 1000 (maybe less would do) people soon after something emerges to ask whether they believe whatever is being stated. No need, I think, to say anything about where they would have gotten the idea.

Another course of action without the big cost of polling is, don't let Rush and Glenn off the hook. Call and ask "What do you think of Obama's refusal to salute the flag". (http://therealtruthproject.blogspot.com/2010/07/get-email-with-extreme-anti-obama.html) I believe their hope, and certainly what serves them best, is for these things to remain invisible to all but their partisans, and certainly not make publicity for them to get publically debunked.

If 10% of people are believing a ludicrous lie that is important news. If one can find out where the lies are coming from (there is too much similarity in style for me to believe they come from random "concerned citizens"), that is even more important news.

As for the "anything goes" blogs, I think they need to be taken seriously too. Here, unlike with the right wing emails, there is nothing secret to unmask. One way to take them seriously is to try to determine the size of their readership - some of them no doubt advertize their 'hit rates'. Also, the idea of polling applies equally well to them. And likewise putting more visible right wing (which I say because "Radical Conservative" is an oxymoron) commentators on the spot.

For an example of Rush&co studiously ignoring the "Final nail in the coffin of the global warming hoax", see http://eisenhowersocialist.blogspot.com/2010/05/climate-change-and-energy-policy.html

Once again, Lefties like Klein provide an excellent exhibition of tilting at windmills :)

As one of your heroes once said:

"The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses." - Vladimir Lenin

That could serve as a mission statement for JournoList.

Despite your attempts at deflection, Klein, no one has said that your group of Lil' Lenins doesn't have the right to have you little mental circle-j#rk club. You absolutely have the right to associate with one another. You absolutely have the right to print your opinions, whatever they may be...no matter how devoid of fact or basis in reality. Heck, you even have the right to coordinate your activities in efforts to push your Leftist agenda.

BUT...

The part you Lefties continually miss is that while you have the right to do all of this stuff, your opponents have the right to expose the fact that you're doing it!

Wow ezra are you a dunce. Tucker's emails are what I call "polishing your knob" The funny part of your defense is that he was not allowed on the list after all due to failing the left's idealiogical purty test which during the 20th century included the deaths of over 100 million innocents due to the same policy's you espouse and follow and have failed everywhere they have been tried. As many other posters have said.....OPEN THE LIST if there is nothing to hide. HACK

Whatever Ezra. Quit boo-hooing about how you tried to let Tucker Carlson in but the other guys in the club wouldn't let you. Who made the "rules" for membership in the first place- that one needed to maintain political beliefs that were "center to left" so that you could have free, open discussion? (That's a reference to your blog from June 25, in case you forgot you wrote that.) Oh right, you did! So the other members held you to your own standards- how dare they!
By the way, how is it conducive to free and open discussion when you limit participation to only those who share your beliefs?
Quite whining.

Face it Ezra... You got caught. Now the cockroaches that are progressive "journalists" are running from the light of day. YOU, sir, are to be thanked actually -- for proving what the "evil, dirty, racist, homophobic, Christian Right Wing nutjobs" was saying... was correct all along.

I think the funniest part of this whole scandal is that for decades, we have heard from the press "We are not biased, we are not biased, we are not biased, we are not biased." Now, when the sheet is removed, their response is "of course we are biased, everyone always knew we were." The one thing that is completely clear in all of this is that the one thing the press truly and completely is: Dishonest.

Ezra, quit whining. Should we really be surprised that you pretended to honor Tucker Carlson's request to join the Mickey Mouse Club by passing the decision off to the members of the group, who, shockingly, said no? Who made the "rule" of membership in the first place- that one had to maintain political beliefs that were center to left so that free and open discussion could take place (that's a reference to your post on June 25, in case you forgot what you said)? Oh, right- it was you! So your group held you to your own standards, and then you could go back to Carlson and say that your hands were tied. You're totally transparent.

By the way, how is it conducive to free and open discussion if you limit the participation to only those who share your beliefs?

Gosh, could there have been another motive here besides just "discussion of ideas?"

You are a real schmuck. In a former life, I went to journalism school and worked as a reporter for several years. In fact, it was my first job right out of high school. I don't recall political affiliation being something that was even permitted to be discussed in the workplace, let alone encouraged among reporters who were REPORTING news!!! That your little elite group made a decision that it would be "left of center" makes me want to yak.

You are simply ticked that Tucker exposed the group's self righteous indignation and obvious bias. You need to revisit the idea of being a journalist and go to a library and find some vintage books about what the craft was created FOR to begin with. It's called objectivity, ya goob.

Mr Klein uses Clinton-ian debating tactics of a) making a distinction between the fact that it was a 'law professor' versus a 'journalist' discussing a shut down of Fox News -- then tries to use that 'lie' as a means to impeach the entire argument and b) claiming it's all just a means to drive up Daily Caller web site traffic anyway. Good try on both counts. Carville/Begala would be proud of you.

The point is simply that a group of liberal Democrat activists that work as journalists attempted to use their position and power to influence the public for their favored candidate -- likely in violation of both their employer's standards and whatever standards of journalism still exist. You can keep splitting hairs, and keep slamming Carlson, but the facts remain as they are.

Racist, racists, racism is all over the news. If you don't mention your Mother's ethnicity that disrespects her. Barry O. had a white Momma and is NOT African American, but a genuine mulatto. That makes the President of the United States a true racist!

Indeed. You will notice that most of the hyper-critical hyperbole comes from folks who rarely if ever post here. But they've made a special trip. Because . . . liberals talk about advancing liberal causes and how they don't like conservatives, when together on a private list.

@mrsy: "By the way, how is it conducive to free and open discussion if you limit the participation to only those who share your beliefs?"

Free association. People grouping together because of shared beliefs and affinities is a constant in American life. From fan-clubs to political PACs, from Media Matters to The Heritage Foundation.

Still, I find the reaction interesting, and look forward to more. Not a lot of discussion about the latest revelations: that Journolist members don't care for Olberman, and, in fact, agree (in some case) with conservatives like myself that Olberman is the mirror-image of Bill O'Reilly.

That being said, I have another prediction: Ezra will post on the subject of Journolist again, before it's all over. ;)

Who do you think you are fooling Ezra? JournoList proves that the "Mainstream" media, and college professors are far left ideaologs, who conspired to falsely report things that they knew were not true, so they could protect Obama and get him elected. Have you no shame? You are not journalists, but criminals. The American people have the right to a free and true press, and we are not getting it from the Washington Post, the New York times and most of the TV news programs. Thank goodness for FOX and the Wall Street Journal or we would be totally hoodwinked. Vote the dems out in November.

Ironically, we have seen certain facts emerge from this. First, the attempt to delegitimize Fox News, was actually attempted. First of all, the Democrats didn't allow Fox to moderate any of their debates, secondly Obama only authorized 2 interviews with Fox, one to get him out of Jeremiah Wright trouble and the second a short 1/2 hour just for show. Finally, once in the White House, tried to use the power of the office to keep Fox News on the sidelines. These things did happen and it does show a thought process for left wing journalists who should believe in freedom of the press, but as is always the case with liberals, it depends on the meaning of the word "free".

Secondly, since President Obama arrived on the scene, the word racist has been thrown around quite liberally. (Pardon the pun). If you disagree with him, you must be racist because his policies are best for everyone. Calling someone a racist is pretty serious, in this day and age, and it's normally a difficult charge to overcome. No so anymore, since it's been thrown around so much, by the left, no one believes them any more.

The mindset shown by these e-mails is what comes when you have individuals who have cocooned themselves in the liberal bubble, for so long, they no longer can relate to anyone outside of it. When you have journalism professors not trying to apply the brakes, to some of the crazy ideas presented, you have to wonder what's being taught in journalism school today.

Take heart Ezra, no one can blame you for starting this. This problem has been around for years and just moved out into the open with the beginnings of Bush Derangement Syndrome. Remember when Cheney was picked for Vice-President and we had newspapers and all the liberal news channels using the word "gravitas" all together. That doesn't happen unless you're in a bubble. When the conservative talk shows do a montage of evening news casts using the exact same language, which just have to be White House or DNC talking points, it just shows everyone how right they are about you guys.

Two points, the first is obvious and the second I make with trepidation:
1. It seems the words speak for themselves; what context do we need with Spencer A's nastiness?
2. A list of the member names seems to show an overwhelmingly Hebrew (Jewish?) membership-- am I correct and if so what is the explanation?

It may be fair and balanced, but I've got a higher standard than that. I'm party to the off-the-record agreement. I haven't broken it. I haven't even broken the off-the-record communications I've had with Carlson, even though doing so would be useful. There are things you just don't do as a journalist, which makes this all the more frustrating. But if anyone thinks that I prefer this drip from the Daily Caller to a more representative sample from the list, I can assure you I don't.

Posted by: Ezra Klein

You live in lala land. If you think the coverage of the election was fair, you are taking serious drugs.

A website where left wing journalist to concoct coordinated coverage to cover some and expose other information; to conspire to attack one candidate and protect another; to blame the other side for the actions of one side; to not report on the history of cabinet members or minimize the associations of your chosen candidate with communist, Marist and crooks so that you could tell your kids how you provided for the election of the "1st Black President", not that you did your job to report the truth to the American electorate, but, to push your agenda is not only unethical but, should be criminal.

YOU (MSM) are possibly responsible for the destruction of Americans' individual rights and the slow drip of recovery because of a corrupt administration and congress, covering up the truth.

You should be fired by your editor and if not, your editor should be fired. But, then, the paper would have to admit they have been complicit in this conspiracy.

Although we released coordinated opinion pieces to reinforce the meme regarding our JournOlist conspiracy, it seems from the comments on my editorial and your own, that the people aren't buying it at all.

Ezra, I'm scared. Meet me in the treehouse soon! We must talk strategy. Can we still smear them as racists? Not sure if we should play that angle, now that the NAACP has also been exposed as a fraud. They smell blood, Ezra! Handle it!

Ezra Klein is a complete liar. He has made statements that have been demonstrably proved to be lies. No coordiantion with campaign? Lie. No campaign or administration members as Journalist members? Lie. No organizing talking points? Lie. Lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie. These frauds, parading as journalists, should be summarily fired by any MSM organization that cares about its reputation. And when you meet them on the street, they should be greeted with the same methods that they seek for conservatives, see Ackerman. And times 10!! You are unethical partisan liars, and I can only hope that you suffer some horrible event that devastates you and your evil family.

What a pathetic excuse for a journalist you are. None of you is smart enough or intellectually honest enough to admit the blatant, obvious truth: What you did violated the very core ethics of journalism. You're all hacks, and any respectable organization would fire you. This, clearly, does not include the Washington Post.

Seems kind of dishonest to me to claim you tried to voluntarily add him to the list. That wording makes it sound like you entered his info into the system and it just would not take. Did you run everyone else past the group before adding them also? I thought this was your list, you were the one in charge, the buck stops with you. Yes or no?

Every single hard news reporter who participated in a conspiracy on how to tailor news coverage in order to help elect Barack Obama should be permanently fired from their position and every single news agency that finds these reporters in their ranks owes the public an apology.

And the next time Fox News covers a story such a White House Communications Director who tells high school students that Mao is one her "favorite political philosopher" and who she "turns to most", the mainstream should report and let the public decide!!!

The silence on major news stories was the greatest crime by a whole host of news organizations----and I am willing to bet good money that every one has a reporter on THIS list and there was specific discussions on ignoring stories!

TUCKER CARLSON IS BREAKING THE BIGGEST STORY IN MODERN JOURNALISM HISTORY!!!

Why does Tucker Carlson continue to hide his source material? If he released his source material we could all see how EVIL and DARK this mega concpiracy truly is. Is Carlson protecting someone? is he hiding something from his fellow patriots? if he simply released all the email Carlson could clarify this whole thing.

Why won't Carlson do that? And if he is hiding this from us what else is Tucker and The Daily Caller hiding?

Huh? What on earth did Klein demonstrate? Does any of this trivial nonsense have anything to do with the fact that we had a liberal clique of partisan activists passing themselves off as journalists?

I also love the whining about "cherry picking" and words taken "out of context". Lord knows that losers like Klein did that to the Tea Party with relish. As usual, liberal hypocrites whine about actions that they themselves engage in.

I'm glad this is your last word on the subject, because this sniveling is getting tiresome. "Trust me, don't trust him", he said, she said..

Sorry, but any trust you might have merited has been burned. It's gone. You want us to believe you've been wronged you need to put up the evidence to support that assertion and it's obvious you're not going to do that, so give it a rest.

A man of integrity would have told everyone months ago that there were members of the Leftwing media who were knowingly unfairly labeling conservatives racist in order to protect a Presidential candidate?

A man with an ounce of integrity would have spoken up as soon as the agreed upon smear tactics agreed upon on your Journo-List began to appear in column after column about Sarah Palin.

But you chose Barack Hussein Obama over principle and integrity. And now you double down on the unscruplous behavior by dragging the WashPost resources again in to your childish rantings against the people who reported on your unsavory activity?

These guys aren't "journalists" Even the Washington Post should be above this kind of use and manipulation of the news to support a political agenda. Slanting a story and managing placement on the web site and printed page are one thing. Lying and conspiring to drive opinion are another.

Imagine the news that was withheld and manipulated by these liars when they were smart enough to do it without posting their ideas where they might be found by real journalists. Mr. Klein clearly does not respect his trade, and this disgusting drama should convince the paper he should go.

I was amazed at all the racist and criminal elements Obama was connected with and why they were not being reported during his campaign run. Now I find that journolisters conspired together to hide Obama's criminal connections (ACORN, Rezko, Wright, Ayers, etc). You, Ezra Klein, and your journolisters should not only be fired you should be sued for libel because your intent to defame is evident in your journolist postings.

@Kevin_Willis:
Your post
@mrsy: "By the way, how is it conducive to free and open discussion if you limit the participation to only those who share your beliefs?"

Free association. People grouping together because of shared beliefs and affinities is a constant in American life. From fan-clubs to political PACs, from Media Matters to The Heritage Foundation.

Interesting that you draw a parallel between the Journalists and fan clubs, political PACs, Media Matters, & the Heritage Foundation. All groups with a specific agenda that goes beyond simple discussion. Thank you for proving my point.

Is this the best Klein can do in riposte? It's rather weak. If there is nothing else to hide about liberals behaving badly, then one would think Mr. Klein would simply release all the emails. Or are only journalists allowed the privacy they deny everyone else?

If I take yout word that you made it mandatory to be left of center as the only requirement, you could have included most of Congress. Yes, even the republicans. For example. For several years, I have described the parties as being on a football field and from my view from the seats, I would place the democratic party on the 5 yard line to the left. For most of the republicans, I would place them on about the 10 yard line to the left. During that same time, I have called the MSM a liberal support group. Your actions as described by Carlson puts you in that liberal support group. In the end, you betrayed the trust placed in journalism by the public. Own up to it and do right from now on with publishing the truth.

We never tried to coordinate stories among news reporters. It was all just good clean fun, high spirits and cameraderie, nothing to see here.

I tried to get a conservative on the list, but the other members wouldn't let me.

He's taken things out of context, misquoted everyone and just raised a stink over nothing.

I'm a credible, responsible reporter who only tried to run an interesting conversation.

Tomorrow, I'll be writing stories that are nothing but fact, no spin, no lies.

*****
Sorry, Ezra, your list has been exposed as a partisan calliope that helped shape the news instead of reporting it, cover for political friends and suppress stories for political enemies, and generally act as a propaganda tool of the Democratic Party.

I won't be reading any more of your work either. Nor that nasty Ackerman, Krugman the Nobel fool, and Weigel the fake columnist.

It's a shame the paper that reported Watergate can't find the integrity to report the DOJ / NBPP story for over a month, and still hasn't really developed anything new in it. But that's OK - once the circulation figures drop into the low thousands, the advertisers will figure out better places to put their dollars, and you can retire to an alley to drink your retirement away.

A shame, really - once this was a newspaper, now it's just a politically-owned tabloid. Enjoy irrelevance, you've earned it.

Give it up, Ezra. You can only say, "Move along, folks -- nothing to see here" for so long until people begin asking the obvious question, "If it's as banal as you claim ... and if Carlson really took the conversations out of context ... then why are you so wimpy about making the archives public?"

Or in less polite terms: "Open up or shut up."

Fact is, Carlson has already presented clear evidence that what happened in Journolist didn't stay in Journolist -- to the contrary, it found its way into print and onto TV with the same anti-conservative, pro-Obama slant that was discussed in strategy sessions on Journolist.

I'm not troubled by the fact that a group of reporters wasn't fond of Sarah Palin, but there's a huge difference between bad-mouthing her over a couple of cold ones after work and supplying each other with tips on how to undermine her candidacy in the media ... and/or how to protect Obama's campaign by leveling false accusations of "racism" against conservative commentators.

When so-called professional journalists begin acting more like political activists for a single party, any pretense of being guardians of the people dissolves amid fits of laughter.

Public watchdogs? More like Obama lapdogs.

It's a sad joke that you banned members of the government from joining -- because in the long run you were basically Obama administration staffers anyway.

Ezra Klein wrote: "There are things you just don't do as a journalist, which makes this all the more frustrating."
________________________________

*** That's absolutely true, Ezra -- and some of those things include "shilling for a particular presidential candidate," "presenting bias in the guise of objectivity," and "destroying people's reputations with bogus allegations of racism."

Really, Ezra ... if anybody has to explain this to you, then you really need to take the rest of the summer off and enroll in a freshman-level Journalism Ethics course.

The MSM has been misrepresenting and lying, mostly by omission, for decades. It's about time they're being called on it-glad to see it. I believe Klein is shocked, just shocked I tell you, when the lefts own tactics are used against them. Again, it's about time Klein. Turnabout is fair play in my book so deal with it as the dominance of a left leaning MSM is coming to a close.

Ezra
Why so defensive? If it was nothing more than an exercise in superior, intellectual thought among a group of lefty twerps like you, just blow it off. You're far too superior to respond to such pedestrian criticism.
Or do you need to change your shorts a few times a day now that your little club has been exposed.
Love to see dirtbags squirm!

Ezra Klein Lied and said "There are no government or campaign employees on the list."

Well it turned out Jared Bernstein, Vice President Joe Biden's chief economic adviser, was on the list
Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA is on the lisat. Yes Ezra UCLA is owned by the state of California so they are a government employee.
Michael O’Hare, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley is also on the list.

Ezra hpw can the WP employee such an outright liar?
You also lied about Fox News and the firing of Sherrod. The NAACP asked Obama to fire her and Obama did fire her before the story was even covered on Fox news. The NAACP had the complete video tape. And the president of the NAACP was there in person when she gave that speech. And he still wanted her fired that first day. If she was unfairly fired it was Obama that fired her not Fox News.

This comment thread is pathetic. There is nothing ambiguous about an expectation of privacy when writing to a private list with a moderated membership. This was never intended for public consumption.

The real "context" is that there was no context in contributions to a freewheeling list. Some would have people believe that contributors shared their "true" feelings. People shared undeveloped and unpolished ideas - sometimes to provoke a response - without concern for inference. People are sarcastic, nuanced and spontaneous out of anger or frustration.

On his MSNBC show, Mr. Carlson once said " ... they DID find weapons of mass destruction." Tucker is still looking for those weapons to damage his political adversaries.

Is Arianna Huffington , George Soros,David Brock or Jane Hamsher on the list?
Jane Hamsher is the liberal blobber that blackfaced Joe Lieberman. She also calls Lieberman's campaign workers Liberyouth. Just like Nazi youth. I bet you never complained about her unfair attacks on your list or about her blackfacing a jewish man.
It probably was all planned on your stupid list.

tech1959: "The NAACP asked Obama to fire [Sherrod] and Obama did fire her before the story was even covered on Fox news. The NAACP had the complete video tape. And the president of the NAACP was there in person when she gave that speech."
----------------------------------------

This is how the BS spreads like manure in August. This is incoherent fact salad. Supposed conversations between the NAACP and the Obama administration are baseless speculation.

Breitbart posted his deceptively edited video on Monday morning, July 19. Fox posted this on the web at about noon on the same day. Sherrod resigned later in the day.

There is NO evidence that Mr. Jealous was present at the event. Furthermore, there is no tape. The provenance of the digital recording remains unknown. Once again, Breitbart is attempting to shift the blame to the NAACP.

here are you defending George Soros http://bit.ly/a7zj8A
You you understand Soros makes money when the US ecomony goes down the tubes? He not only beats against the dollar but he buys businesses at bargain prices.

CriticalThinker4 if Obama can't handle a critical video on the internet without going around firing black people without investigating what the facts are he should be criticized.
She did resign before the video was ever shown on Fox News. And no one on Fox news asked that she be fired. The NAACP released the whole video of her speech so they did have her speech. And it was an NAACP even that she spoke at.

Ezra, Ezra, Exra, have you ever heard of the old country saying "too clever by half"? It perfectly describes your response to the DC articles. I've seen you adopt this falsely humble and judicious pose before, and it might work for those whose critical thinking skills have been overwhelmed by ideology, but for the clearheaded thinker, it only makes clear your hypocrisy.

My takeaway - Ezra started and ran this thing. He knew well that it exposed the low character of many of his peers. That he continues to keep such company says much more about him than bickering about details. It's sort of like arguing about the color of the water your drowning in, Ezra. My advice, it's time for some real humility.

CriticalThinker4 and Fox News saw the same video the White house saw. When the WH saw it they thought she should be fired. Their view of the video was worse than Fox News view was. If anyone's reaction was extreme on this it was the WH. They made her pull her car over to side of the road and resign right that instant. Not even a chance to tell her side on the phone much less in person.

I think this is correct. Who cares that a bunch of liberal reporters and academics get together and talk in private, and occasionally some of them say shocking (to conservatives) things? Some allegedly wanted to have the government shutdown Fox News. I know lots of liberals who feel that way. I know lots of conservatives would be fine with Olbermann being thrown off the air too.
Posted by: justin84 | July 22, 2010 7:33 PM

I had to laugh, as a conservative, I relish the fact that people like Olberman, Maddow and Schultz have shows on TV, they show the rest of the country what "true" liberals think.Of course most of their audience ,all six of them, are of like mind.I sneak a peek just for laughs.

Well buddy, all good things come to an end and don't you worry; we're going to give you the opportunity for full disclosure in the venue you like the most - court. I think the FCC and FEC will be quite active, but the Organized Criminal Control Act of 1970 is something you (and the other 400 participants in your little conspiracy party) are going to become intimately familiar with. First, we file a complaint against you pursuant to FCC regulations (47USC399B) and then we will get the RICO complaint going.

Here's the part you will really like, comrade...

We're going to help you promote the redistribution of wealth - yours! You won the class-action lawsuit derby, baby! You get to find out what it is like to be broke, unemployed and a convicted felon. Of course, you could try and get your sentence reduced by flipping on the Obama campaign, but we'll worry about that later.

In the meantime, I hope you have the money and connections to hire a lawyer. I think we both know what is going to happen next - it will be time for the bar of accountability and we are going to take a full accounting of your wealth. Imagine, using the courts to redistribute the wealth of all 400 of you to Sarah Palin and the GOP. Man, you just can't find irony like that. Hey, maybe you should write a story about it. Better yet, you need to write a book baby and save those funds for paying the judgments you are going to have.

Mr. Klein's elitist dismissal of anyone who does not anoint him as above criticism, brings to mind the homes where a child is the center of attention from the moment he is born and told constantly that whatever he has to say is not only brilliant but correct, and needn't be discussed further except for the torrent of deserved accolades.

Especially given the reality that the left, of whom Mr. Klein is most decidedly a representative, has come down on the wrong side of almost every issue in the last 50 years, has repeatedly proclaimed outcomes that not only failed to materialize but usually were diametrically opposed to the actual outcome, has failed to consider all of the unintended (and often catastrophic) consequences of so many of its calls to action, acts much like birds on a wire, one takes off and all the rest immediately follow suit, and hasn't actually had a new idea in 50 years, perhaps it is time for Mr. Klein to stop believing his adoring "critics" and instead, to reflect on his own beliefs.

Obviously, there will be no ground breaking on Mr. Klein's appearance on Ms. Maddow's show this evening. In fact, it will feel very reminiscent of Mr. Klein's childhood dinner table where he sat, exclaiming "what a good boy am I" for his adoring parents.

If Klein goes on Maddow that will show what a lying hypocrite he is. He claims he is against advocacy journalism. You can't get any more advocacy than MSNBC. One of their hosts claims he had thrill go up his leg when Obama speaks.
MSNBC also pushes Global because it's owner GE says it will make billions off cap and trade.
You are a hypocrite Klien.

Ez,
I have an idea, let's call Joe Klein and Ackerman and make up some dirt on Tucker. Call him a racist or misogynist and anit Transgendered...whatever it takes. C’mon guys…Krugman says he will back it up and I got the OK from Gibbs. I bet Brian Williams will even run it.

dear ho to the demoncrat party, why don't you print those letting off steam comments to us little people.

Like most multiculturalists, he has passed his entire adulthood in a very narrow unicultural environment where your ideological worldview doesn't depend on anything so tedious as actually viewing the world.

the putrid diseased left with 0 morals pretends to tell real people how to live?

greedy grasping entitled welfare-monkey.

how liberalism repackaged selfish special interests as "compassion": schools run for the benefit of unionized teachers, not students; welfare that served administrators rather than the poor; trade protections that enriched favored industries at the expense of the general public.

Ezra - all of your weak arguments and attempts to downplay what has come out of Journolist-gate fail to explain the simple fact that Obama was elected without a thorough media vetting because a high percentage of journalists is/was biased in favor of Obama to the point of obsession. The fact that Obama was given a pass despite having sat for over a decade listening to the hyper-racist, hate-filled Rev. J. Wright tirades, in and of itself is mind-numbing. I would have walked out the first time Wright spewed one of his pitiful sermons. I would expect any of my friends, my family, and associates to have done the same. Why did you and your "liberal" mob ask so little of Obama in 2008?

Why did a politician, climbing from the sewers of Chicago politics, get past an "objective" media without so much as a simple analysis of his policial make-up? Obama's comment that he would bomb Pakistan - left untouched.

The Journolist scandal is the disgusting result of retrogressive group-think. The thing you see so clearly in others is exactly what you and your journolist colleagues are - small minded and intolerant. To paraphrase the candidate you elected president in 2008,"the best way to disenfect this disease is with sunshine."

What a bunch of freakin' BABIES y'all are. Ezra created a list on the INTERNET for cripes sake where like minded journalists/bloggers/writers could have a discussion. Even RANT if they wanted. He did it in a forum that he is comfortable in. You know ONLINE you old fogies. It got busted by people that wanted to show that BIG OLE' MEAN LIBERAL MEDIA. OH GROW UP! This forum is nothing more than you jackholes do at the local watering spot. BUT EZRA DID IT and didn't let the lying FAUX NEWS people in. There is NO PLACE that we can have a discussion EVER because everyone hops on and ACCUSES people of nefarious intent. IS THIS THE AMERICA WE GREW UP IN? IS THIS THE AMERICA YOU WANT? I'm in my fifties and I can answer from MY place...NO FLIPPIN' NO. The media WAS NOT in the tank for Obama. That's just lying BS...read history. AND TELL THE TRUTH. Lord.

I knew a long time ago that Carlson was a right wing jerk. He created this story so he could get traffic for his website. He failed at everything else, and has to count on the gullibility of rebaggers to support him. After reading some of the responses, assumunig Tuck didnt write them himself it looks like hes got you pegged. Now I would like to see all the stuff Tuck wrote while he had the Bushs back. All the email please? Bet theres a lot more ugly stuff and lies in his correspondence. Has to be. He was backing the repubs you know. I hear his personal stuff would be interesting to real conservatives as well.

A piece in this morning's WSJ "Health Law Augurs Transfer of Funds From Old to Young" http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703340904575285002595068326.html?mod=googlenews_wsj.

Carlson's DAILY CALLER reprinted and flipped the headline to "Health care law transferring funds from young to old" http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/26/health-care-law-transferring-funds-from-young-to-old/.

This is not tagged as commentary - so I assume this is "responsible journalism"? I wonder what reporter Janet Adamy thinks about this use of her article.

Why is the Washington Post giving space to Klein to do the same thing as Carlson -- reporting the situation from their own perspective. It's an extravagance of embarrassment and reduces the credibility of all involved. The Post's media reporters should pick up from where both sides left off. Of course, the Post would have to take the risk that Klein may be damaged by the ensuing story. I agree with others. If no conspiracy, open the archives to the public and assuage our fears.

2. A journalist's extreme belief that their own views are always best, expressed as thinly-cloaked conspiratorial advocacy for their preferred political viewpoint or candidate, in violation of professional journalism's code of ethics.

"We secretly fight the right,
And by journo, when we do,
We slant the news, mold the country's views,
And sway it's future, too!"